Summary
This post examines the achievements of the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library in India over the past decade. It traces the origins of TKDL to the high-profile Turmeric and Neem patent cases that prompted the Indian government to act. The post details key milestones, including international patent office collaborations and notable patent rejections based on TKDL evidence. It clarifies that TKDL is an impartial resource aimed at preventing the misappropriation of traditional knowledge, regardless of the applicant’s origin. The post concludes with references to comprehensive lists of TKDL’s impact and milestones.
Overview
This post highlights the achievements of the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) over the preceding decade.
Twenty years ago, two patents pushed the Indian government into a period of intense legal activity. These two patents were the Turmeric and Neem patents. In 1995, Suman K. Das and Hari Har P. Cohly were granted a US patent on “Use of Turmeric in Wound Healing”, and in the same year WR Grace was granted a patent for neem-based bio-pesticides. This forced the Indian government to pursue a decade-long legal battle, which it ultimately won. The episode acted as a wake-up call and paved the way for an initiative known as the TKDL, or Traditional Knowledge Digital Library.
TKDL has become both an instrument for the protection of traditional knowledge and a resource against bio-piracy of such knowledge. The database has received recognition from nations that have rich traditional practices and have found themselves subject to bio-piracy of traditional knowledge.
Major Milestones of the TKDL
The following table sets out the major milestones that the TKDL has observed over the last decade.
| Year | Major Events |
| 2005 | Request for access to TKDL by EPO |
| Initiation of project on TKDL Siddha | |
| Creating of TKRC containing approx. 25,000 subgroups | |
| 2006 | Request by United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for access to TKDL database |
| 2008 | Initiation of activities on creation of TKDL Yoga |
| 2009 | TKDL Access Agreement concluded with European Patent Office (EPO) |
| Request for access to TKDL by German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA) | |
| TKDL Access Agreement concluded with United States Patent Office (USPTO) | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP1607006 filed by Uniliver for “Functional berry composition”, was deemed to be withdrawn. | |
| 2010 | TKDL Access Agreement concluded with United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (IPO) |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP1660106 filed by Avesthagen for “Biotherapeutics for Mitigation of health Disorders from Terminalia Arjuna”, was deemed to be withdrawn. | |
| TKDL Access Agreement concluded with Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) | |
| 2011 | TKDL Access Agreement concluded with Intellectual Property Australia (IP Australia) |
| Based on the TKDL evidences filed for the application no. CA 2387703 entitled “Method for calming human beings using personal care compositions” by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc, CIPO declared the application as ‘Dead’. | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences filed for the application no. CA 2579562 entitled “Method for improving sleep behaviors” by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc, United States of America, CIPO declared the application as ‘Dead’. | |
| TKDL Access Agreement concluded with Japan Patent Office (JPO) | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP1553851 filed by L’Oreal for “Cosmetic composition for preventing and/or correcting the functional disorders of the pilo-sebaceous unit of mammals”, was deemed to be withdrawn. | |
| 2012 | Based on the TKDL evidences, Nestec had to withdraw their application no. EP2251029 for “Lactoferrin and gut neuronal health in adults and/or elderly.” |
| Colgate-Palmolive Company had to amend the claims of the publication no. EP2192910 entitled “Oral compositions containing botanical extracts” | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP2144591 filed by The Procter & Gamble Company for “Personal care compositions comprising an Antimicrobial Blend of essential oils or constituents thereof”, was withdrawn. | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP2139504 filed by Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited for “Standardized Bioactive Herbal Extracts”, was deemed to be withdrawn. | |
| Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP2157978 filed by BASF Beauty Care Solutions for “MC-1 R, MC-2 R, and MU Opioid Receptors Modulation”, was deemed to be withdrawn. | |
| 2013 | CGPDTM refused the application no. 1864/DEL/2006 entitled “A novel herbal composition and a process for preparation thereof effective against Diarrhaea and Dysentery” filed by Central Council for Research in Unani Medicines (CCRUM), India, based on the TKDL evidences. |
| CGPDTM refused the application no. 1313/DEL/2006 entitled “A preparation for the treatment of running and stuffy nose, productive or non-productive cough with or without fever and to a process for the preparation thereof” filed by Central Council for Research of Ayurveda and Siddha, India, based on the TKDL evidences. | |
| 2014 | Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP2293689 filed by Mars, Incorporated for “Food product”, was deemed to be withdrawn. |
| TKDL Access Agreement with Chile Patent Office (INAPI) | |
| 2015 | Based on the TKDL evidences, application no. EP2689806 filed by the Colgate-Palmolive Company for “Oral compositions containing extracts of myristica fragrans and related methods”, was cancelled. |
| BASF Beauty Care Solutions had to amend the claims of the publication no. EP2157966 for “MC-1R, MC-2R, AND/OR [mu] OPIOID RECEPTORS STIMULATION” based on the TKDL evidences. |
Significance of the TKDL
What the table above illustrates is that the TKDL is not an initiative directed against any particular country or region. It is an impartial resource whose sole aim is to strike down those applications which seek to patent traditional knowledge that is already in the public domain. This is evident from the fact that the CGPDTM has refused several applications filed by Indian applicants and research organisations, as well as by multinational corporations. The complete list of applications successfully countered using TKDL is maintained by the TKDL project.
Disclaimer
This article is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified attorney before acting on any matter discussed here.